Secret Peel plan results: 9,196-489

The Yukon government's own numbers - suppressed until now - show there's little public support for its decision to dump the final recommended Peel watershed land use plan.

It was recently forced to release response numbers from last winter's public consultation to the Yukon News under an access to information request.

The new figures show 9,196 responses favoured accepting the Peel planning commission's land use plan while only 489 said it should be rejected.

As for the government's new plan, which it presented during the consultation under the guise of four “proposed concepts,” only 97 responses supported it.

The government's numbers were supposed to be part of its What We Heard report. An easy-to-read table of themes and figures was included in the first two drafts. By the time it was released to the public in early April “Appendix 1” had been removed, but a reference to the numbers had inadvertently remained. 

The new numbers still don't include any verbal submissions made during public meetings held in Whitehorse, Mayo, Dawson City, Fort McPherson, Old Crow, Tsiigehtchic, Aklavik and Inuvik.  

More than 800 people attended one of the events. Not one person who spoke publically favoured ditching the plan prepared by the commission after six years and $1.5 million worth of work.

When the government was asked about what it heard from the public, it tried to pretend the response was anything but clear-cut.

Although these new results come as no surprise - independent analysis of the public feedback produced similar findings - they do raise more questions about the government's handling of the Peel file. 

Discussions about the future of the wilderness watershed moved behind closed doors last spring.

The government says it's meeting with the four affected First Nations - Na-cho Nyak Dun, Tr'ondek Hwech'in, Vuntut Gwitchin and the Gwich'in Tribal Council.

It has presented its position and is waiting for a response.

First Nations say the government has violated the Umbrella Final Agreement by waltzing in with a new plan at this late stage.That treaty sets out the process for regional land use planning in the territory.

They've threatened to take the Yukon government to court if it rejects the commission's plan.

Several weeks ago there was a change of command at the department in charge of the Peel plan. Brad Cathers was replaced as minister of energy, mines and resources by former Yukon Chamber of Mines executive director Scott Kent.

Click here to see the first draft of the government's table of numbers and click here to view the final draft.

To read the final What We Heard report, click here.

No more Peel for Cathers' playlist

After nearly two years of stick-handling the thorny Peel watershed issue, Yukon cabinet minister Brad Cathers has been pulled from the Energy, Mines and Resources post.

Brad Cathers

He's been sent to Community Services while Scott Kent moves from education to take Cathers' place.

The change was part of a larger cabinet shuffle announced Monday.

Cathers has taken a lot of heat trying to defend his government's decision to dump the land use plan produced by the Peel Watershed Planning Commission.

His department's replacement plan was roundly criticized by First Nations, conservation and tourism groups, and most of the public who participated in the consultations.

Although final talks between the government and First Nations have now gone behind closed doors, it looks likely the whole controversy is headed straight to court.

This change at the top gives the Yukon government a chance to alter its position without losing too much face.

Kent has never been a fan of protecting the Peel –- even when his then Liberal Party supported it - but he is well-versed on the issue.

He was the executive director of the Yukon Chamber of Mines when the Peel planning controversy moved to centre stage. He's also been the minister of that department before, from 2000 to 2002 when the Liberals were in power.

The other two ministers on Premier Darrell Pasloski's Peel team remain the same. Currie Dixon stays on as both minister of the environment and economic development.  Mike Nixon keeps tourism and justice.

Although many expected Vuntut Gwitchin MLA Darius Elias would get a cabinet post as a reward for joining the Yukon Party in early July, that didn't happen.

When he crossed the floor, he told the media the Peel file caused him some concern and that he'd be keeping an eye on it.

For the time being, he'll be doing that from the backbench.

Elias is vice-chair of the legislature's newly-formed fracking committee. That could be prove to be more challenging than he first expected since his First Nation just passed a motion to keep its traditional territory frack-free. It encompasses most of the northern Yukon along with parts of the Peel watershed.

Peel protection 'last-of-our-lifetime' chance

The Yukon government could do its bit to help protect at least 50% of Canada’s boreal forest by accepting the Peel commission’s final recommended land use plan, says a group of international scientists.

That plan recommends protecting 80% or 13 millions acres of the watershed.

It “should be adopted by the Yukon government,” says the International Boreal Conservation Science Panel in its new report, Conserving the World’s Last Great Forest is Possible: Here’s How.

Large scale conservation of areas like the Peel is one of  the “last-of-our-lifetime” opportunities for boreal protection from the Yukon to Newfoundland, says the report.

In every region, the “last great forest” is under siege from mining, oil/gas and forestry, it says.

But it’s not too late to strike a true balance between conservation and development if decision-makers take the panel’s recommendations on how to move forward.

Among the panel's key scientific guidelines:

•  At least 50% of the boreal region should be permanently protected from further development to maintain current ecological processes and wildlife species.
• Industrial activities on boreal lands, outside of those where development is prohibited, should be carried out with the lowest possible impact on biodiversity and the ecosystems.
• Land-use planning should precede decisions regarding industrial development in the boreal and must be led by local communities. Particular attention must be paid to the views and concerns of aboriginal communities in the region.
• The impact of development and other industrial boreal land use should be rigorously monitored and regularly and meaningfully reviewed by independent experts. 

The Yukon government told local media it’s not commenting on the panel's boreal report.

It's in final talks about the Peel plan with the four affected First Nations – Na-cho Nyak Dun, Tr’ondek Hwech’in, Gwich’in Tribal Council and Vuntut Gwitchin.

Up to this point, it has vehemently opposed the commission’s plan, saying the wilderness watershed should be open to industrial development.

It's drafted its own plan that protects virtually none of the watershed.

Click here to read the full Great Last Forest report.

Frack no

The Council of Yukon First Nations has taken a strong stand against fracking.

The council, which represents most of the Yukon's 14 First Nations, as well as the N.W.T.'s four Gwich'in communities, passed a no-fracking resolution at its recent annual general assembly in Whitehorse.

It calls on the Yukon government to prohibit fracking in the territory and it declares all its traditional territories frack-free.

That includes the Peel watershed - homeland of Mayo's Na-cho Nyak Dun, Dawson's Tron'dek Hwech'in and Fort McPherson's Tetlit Gwich'in. The Vuntut Gwitchin, based in Old Crow, don't belong to the council.

So far the Yukon's fledgling oil and gas industry hasn't used hydraulic fracturing.

But it wants to.

Northern Cross, which is 60 per cent owned by China's CNOOC, spent this past winter exploring for oil and gas in the Eagle Plain basin. Its vast north Yukon holdings include parts of the Peel.

Last year it told assessors it wanted to use fracking, but later withdrew the controversial request.

Global petro-giant Chevron also has oil and gas interests in the northern Yukon, in addition to its Crest iron claims in the Peel.

It's paired up with Apache Resources to frack for natural gas in the B.C. portion of the transboundary Liard basin.The companies are eager to move into the Yukon part of the basin as soon as possible. But the territory's Kaska people have already made it clear they don't want fracking in the southeast region.

The industry has also set its sights on the Whitehorse basin. It stretches from Carcross to Carmacks and includes about 80 per cent of the Yukon's entire population. The current moratorium on its oil/gas development is only in place until the next territorial election.

In an attempt to quell growing opposition to fracking, the Yukon government recently created a committee of MLAs to study its "risks and benefits." 

Three of its six MLAs belong to the ruling Yukon Party: Environment and Economic Development Minister Currie Dixon, committee chair Patti McLeod (Watson Lake) and backbencher Stacey Hassard (Pelly-Nisutlin).

The others are NDP MLA Jim Tredger (Mayo-Tatchun), Liberal MLA Sandy Silver (Klondike) and Independent Darius Elias, who represents the riding of Vuntut Gwitchin.

So far the committee has only met once and that was behind closed doors. Most of its meetings will likely  be held in secret except for public meetings it has committed to hold in Old Crow and Watson Lake.

It's supposed to report its findings to the legislature by next spring.

Peel makes top 10 boreal hotspot list

Fans of the Peel watershed won't be surprised to learn it's been singled out as one of the coolest hotspots for biodiversity in Canada's boreal forest.

The Peel is one of 10 wilderness areas recognized for their natural assets in a national report by Ducks Unlimited and the Boreal Songbird Initiative that was released on International Biodiversity Day.

The 10 Cool Canadian Biodiversity Hotspots: How a New Understanding of Biodiversity Underscores the Global Significance of Canada’s Boreal Forest report highlights the Peel's role as a biological refuge.

"Most of northern North America was once covered by an unimaginably vast ice sheet for thousands of years. But a few special islands of land in the North remained free of this life-stopping deep freeze. The 67,000-km² Peel River watershed was one of these wildlife refuges that allowed many species to survive the ice ages," the report says.

"Today, this ancient 'Noah’s Ark' is still virtually undisturbed by modern large-scale industrial activities and retains many of these relict rare and range-restricted species of mosses, vascular plants, and animals. Range-restricted mammals like the mountainous Dall’s Sheep, the singular singing vole, and the collared pika occur within the watershed while many other mammals show genetic footprints that indicate a distinct separate evolutionary history from their look-a-like cousins in the rest of Canada. Separate evolutionary lineages of otherwise widespread fish species can be found in many fish populations in the Peel River watershed.

"From rugged mountain peaks, high plateaus and deep canyons to sprawling river valleys and wetland networks, the Peel River watershed is among Canada’s most scenic and geographically diverse natural wonders. Six parallel tributaries emerge from the northern slopes of the Rocky Mountains and converge in the underlying valley to form the Peel River, which eventually drains into the Mackenzie River Delta and the Arctic Ocean.

"Fish such as broad whitefish, least cisco, arctic cisco and inconnu swim upstream from the Arctic Ocean to the Peel watershed to spawn. The region serves as the wintering grounds for the iconic Porcupine caribou herd - a transboundary herd of barrenground caribou that summers in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge - and is the home of the Yukon’s only population of boreal woodland caribou. Healthy populations of grizzly bears, wolverines and wolves occur here as well. The Peel watershed provides important nesting habitat for raptors, including peregrine falcons (45 pairs as of the 1990s), gyrfalcons, bald eagles and golden eagles."

On the Peel's conservation status, the report has this to say:

"The region has become the focus of intense interest by the mining industry, as evidenced by the more than 8,000 active mining claims in the watershed. A portion of the region has also been identified as an area of interest for oil and gas development.

"The Yukon government set up a Peel Watershed Planning Commission, which worked over many years and with many public meetings to develop a series of recommendations for this remarkable region. In November 2011, the commission released its final recommendations, which called for protection of more than 52,600 km² of the watershed from mining and other industrial development.

"Unfortunately, the Yukon government has signaled its intention to protect only a small fraction of the region and keep large areas open for mining despite the commission’s recommendations."

Click here to read 10 Cool Canadian Biodiversity Hotspots report.

YMAB sings same old Peel song

The latest annual report of the Yukon Minerals Advisory Board shows it hasn't changed its tune on protecting the Peel watershed.

The nine-member board, appointed by the Yukon government, remains staunchly opposed to the Peel commission’s final recommended land use plan. But it has toned down its rhetoric a titch and also scaled back the amount of ink devoted to the topic in its recently-released 2012 report.

 “As Yukon government’s four-month Peel watershed regional land use plan public consultation period concluded in late February, YMAB commends the government for placing emphasis on the comments that were submitted by Yukon residents and companies working in the territory,” says the six-page report, which also deals with other industry issues.

“YMAB supports Yukon government in its efforts to modify the Final Recommended Peel Watershed Regional Land Use Plan and appreciates the government’s recognition of industry’s socio-economic contributions to the region and to the territory, which were inadequately reflected in the Peel Watershed Planning Commission’s process and recommended plan.

“YMAB encourages the Yukon government to remain firm in its position regarding the Recommended Peel Watershed Land Use Plan so that a final plan can be achieved that accommodates a variety of sectors and land users in the region – including mineral exploration and development.”

The board doesn't provide any other detail or rationale for opening the Peel to industrial development rather than preserving its wilderness character.

It does say that with work on a Dawson regional land use plan now underway and five other regions waiting in the wings, the government should develop a policy that would clearly identify its objectives for socio-economic development and “set thresholds for the conservation and protection of Yukon’s land.”

The government also needs to “re-examine the mandate, direction and parameters of land use planning commissions to help ensure a balanced approach to the remaining land use planning processes,” it says.

Despite the many challenges facing the mining industry in the territory, the board continues to rank the Peel high among half a dozen of its most pressing concerns.

The Peel falls below a host of regulatory beefs, but it's placed ahead of energy and infrastructure shortfalls, labour and housing dilemmas, First Nation relations and the need for new tax breaks.

What the YMAB report fails to mention is that the vast majority of respondents to the government's call for comment on the Peel supported protection and urged acceptance of the commission's plan. (Read What they really heard: 85%+ favour plan)  

The nine-member advisory board is chaired by Sue Craig, of Tintina Consultants. It also includes Claire Derome (Yukon Chamber of Mines), Clynt Nauman (Alexco Resource Corp.), Harlan Meade (Selwyn Resources), Shawn Ryan (Ryanwood Exploration Inc.), William Sheriff (Americas Bullion Royalty Corp.), Mark Ayranto (Victoria Gold), Mike McDougall (Klondike Placer Miners Association) and Jerry Asp (Yukon Mine Training Association).

The board, created in 2003, has always been suspicious of land use planning but it stepped up its opposition considerably in 2008 once a land use plan for the Peel began to take shape.

Click here to read the 2012 YMAB report.

Click here to read the 2011 YMAB report.

Dodge, deny, deflect, dismiss: YG on Peel

Yukon politicians had a few final words on the Peel land use plan controversy as they wrapped up the spring sitting this week. NDP leader Liz Hanson grilled the government on its rejection of the Peel commission's plan. Here's the verbatim transcript of what was said:

NDP Leader Liz Hanson:  Members of the public are familiar with the Lonely Planet’s message to tourists about the Yukon: See the majestic wilderness of the Yukon now before it’s altered by industrial activity and climate change. This week the premier announced a September mission to Europe to drum up more interest in the Yukon as a tourism destination. MLAs were then treated to his ministers waxing eloquent about showcasing Yukon’s untouched wilderness to potential European travellers and investors. To the European traveller, untouched wilderness - the number-one value in our tourism marketing efforts - is epitomized by the Peel region.

Now that the premier and his cabinet seem to have rediscovered the value of tourism to the economy, especially in light of faltering commodity prices, how is the Yukon Party government going to explain its rejection of the Final Recommended Peel Watershed Regional Land Use Plan to the European market?

Premier Darrell Pasloski: As we have said throughout this term in office and in fact throughout the election, as well, we believe that the Yukon territory can do both. We can have a strong and growing tourism industry, and we can also have a strong and growing exploration and mining industry. We believe that this Yukon territory has the vast beauty and mineral potential when done through proper channels, through environmental assessment, through permitting programs and through regulations and inspections - we can in fact enjoy the spectacular beauty. That is why all of us live in this territory. We do enjoy the vast beauty in which we live. We are privileged to live here and we also feel very strongly that there is an opportunity both to build a strong economic base and create good, well-paying jobs for Yukoners.

Liz Hanson: During this sitting the Energy, Mines and Resources minister’s spin to justify the Yukon Party’s dismissal of the Peel plan was, “We were elected to represent Yukoners. We were elected by Yukoners. We were not elected to represent the people of Düsseldorf, Pasadena or Toronto.” His words were contradicted by an analysis of the public comments, which found that the vast majority of Yukoners want to see the Peel protected.

Yesterday we heard many words from Yukon Party ministers about the importance of German-speaking Europe for tourism. We know the importance of cultivating relationships for the success of encouraging visitors to come to the Yukon, and we know from tourism surveys that the number-one value for visitors is Yukon’s magnificent wilderness landscapes. So how does the premier intend to do damage control of his minister’s dismissal of the views of the good people of Düsseldorf, the very people we encourage to come and see Yukon’s untouched wilderness?

Environment Minister Currie Dixon: With the land use planning in the Peel region, one of the goals we have is to protect the Peel River watershed, and that is exactly what we plan to do. What we disagree with the NDP on, though, is how best to do that.

We have suggested and fully agree that there are areas in the Peel watershed region that deserve the highest level of protection available, and we are absolutely prepared to undertake to implement that kind of protection. What we disagree with the NDP about, though, is that we have to have an all-or-nothing approach to these things. We believe that it is possible to manage the footprint of activity in certain areas and ultimately protect some of the key areas, as well.

What we will do is continue with the land use planning process as set out under the Umbrella Final Agreement and come up with a land use plan that we believe works for all Yukoners.

Liz Hanson: Actions speak louder than words.

All parties in this legislative assembly recognize the 40^th anniversary of the Umbrella Final Agreement and the breakthrough of colonization to relationships built on equality. All parties were told by First Nation leaders that the relationship is built on deeds, not words, and that they still look forward to the relationship being based on the handshake of equals.

First Nation governments told the Yukon Party government that although they wanted 100 % protection for the Peel, they believed the compromises contained in the final recommended plan are fair and balanced. The government’s response has been to ignore Chapter 11 obligations, dismiss the multi-year consultation process, and dismiss the views of First Nation governments and the voices of thousands of Yukoners who support the final recommended plan.

How can the premier justify the Yukon Party’s rejection of the Peel plan while saying he respects First Nation governments and the intent of the final agreements?

Currie Dixon: In this instance, the member opposite is absolutely wrong. We have absolutely followed the Umbrella Final Agreement.  We remain absolutely committed to the Umbrella Final Agreement and the implementation of all of our obligations under the various land claims in this territory. We do it every day when we plan special management areas, habitat protection areas and other aspects of the Umbrella Final Agreement and the specific First Nation land claim agreements.

For her to suggest that we are somehow breaching our obligation is simply inaccurate, and I absolutely disagree with her. 

What we will do is to continue to follow the Umbrella Final Agreement. We will continue to consult with our First Nations planning partners as we are required to do by that agreement, and when we conclude that process we’ll ultimately end up with a land use plan that we feel represents the best way forward for the Yukon and for all Yukoners. That’s of course our priority. We’ve said that before and we’ll say it again. So for the member opposite to assert that we somehow aren’t living up to our obligations, she’s absolutely wrong. We’re following the Umbrella Final Agreement to a T and intend to continue to do so throughout the land use planning process.